Socialism in the present day - Alexander Bogdanov

In this text from 1911, published in Vpered, Bogdanov outlines his conception of a socialist proletarian culture,
providing the theoretical background for the project of Proletkult.
https://libcom.org/library/socialism-present-day-alexander-bogdanov

A socialist society is one in which all social production is organised on

consciously comradely principles. All the other features of socialism
stem from this fact: social ownership of the means of production,
abolition of class, and wealth distribution which allows everyone to
fully use their productive energy according to their ability. These
conditions can only be realised when there is a basis for their
existence comradely organisation of all production, i.e. only when
the working class achieves victory and gains the ability to organise
society on its own terms. Until that moment, the gradual
disappearance of class, the gradual move towards a social ownership
of the means of production, and a planned distribution of the social
product, will not be possible. Any socialism in the property relations

between people is not possible until labour relations become fully

socialist relations.
Opportunists are mistaken when they search for the origins of a
socialist economy in trade unions, cooperatives, in the enterprises of
a democratic state and territorial self-government. The increase of the
workers wage, forced on capitalists by the trade unions, has nothing
to do with socialist distribution, if only because it does not provide the
guarantee of being able to earn that wage. The property of a
cooperative remains capitalist property if only because it is subject to
buying and selling, takes the form of money, is stored in a bank, is
dependent on the economic cycle and changing prices, etc. The
enterprises of even the most democratic state or the equally
democratic self-government, in which socialists constitute a majority,
do not stop being capitalist enterprises, as they are organised on the
basis of employment of workers, are subservient to the conditions on
the labour market, on the market of tools and objects of labour, on the
money and credit market, etc. As long as the the power of money and
capital the master of world production, are upheld, there is no way
we can speak of a socialist economy.
However, socialism is not only about the future, but also about the
present, it is not only an idea but also a reality. Socialism grows and
develops, exists among us. Only not where our opportunist comrades
search for it. Socialism lies deeper. It is the comradely bond of the
working class, its conscious organisation of labour and its social
struggle. We should not search for socialism in the economic activity
of workers organisations, trade unions, parties, or others, but in
actual class cooperation. This is not the socialist prototype, but it is its
real foundation as it lies within comradely bonds of labour. The more
this cooperation grows and develops, the tighter the frames of old
society become, and the contradiction between the two becomes
clearer. The time when these frames start to fall apart under the
powerful pressure of a new power, which requires new forms, is not
far off. Everything indicates that a series of dangerous revolutions will
begin under our own eyes. This epoch of the last struggle will surely
be incredibly difficult, and revolutionary crises incredibly cruel. But
eventually the rotten shell will be cast aside. Socialism will cease to
be just the class cooperation of the proletariat and will take over

production as a whole. New organisation of property and distribution,

a new social economy, will then become reality.
Someday socialism will become everything, for now it is already a
powerful tendency, paving its way in reality with a concrete social
force antithetical to other social forces, a specific method of
organisation of people antithetical to other methods. Of course, the
contemporary conscious socialist combatant is not a selfless
protagonist, sacrificing himself for future generations, but a worker
taking part in the creation of contemporary life. It is completely
obvious and understandable that a large and powerful social class
wants to live its own way, and not how the old society dictates; that it
develops its own forms of interpersonal relationships and expresses
them in its own social ideal. This ideal arises from a proletarian spirit,
not from pure dreams of fraternity or as a result of protest against a
cruel social order. It is the reflection of the actual development of
labour relations within the working class, remaining in deep
contradiction with the existing system. The conscious comradely
organisation of the working class today, and the socialist organisation
of the whole society in the future these are only the different
instances of the same process, different stages of the development of
the same phenomenon.
If so, then the struggles for socialism cannot be reduced only to the
war against capitalism, to the simple accumulation of forces
necessary to wage that war. This struggle is simultaneously a
positive, creative effort the building of ever new socialist elements
in the proletariat itself, in its internal relations, under conditions of
everyday life. It is the construction of a socialist proletarian culture.
The field of this work are the various areas of life. It is not enough to
unite proletarians in organisations, it is not even enough to put
forward the slogan of economic and political struggle, just as it is not
enough to enlist soldiers in an army and announce the military
campaign. The main strength of an army lies in what they call
morale, i.e. in its internal ties and interrelations, in unity of thought
and feeling, which penetrate and transform it into a living unified
organism. The same concerns the working class. Only its task is
immeasurably broader and more complex compared to the tasks of
an ordinary army. This means the internal ties of the proletariat, its
spirit of unity, needs to be even tighter and deeper.

Socialists should aim at developing the truly comradely relations in

the practice of the proletariat. Meanwhile, even in organisations we
can observe a mass of holdover relations, which have nothing to do
with socialism: conflicts of ambitions, authoritarian temptations of
various leaders, and the unconscious subordination of some
supporters to them, aversion of anarchistically inclined individuals to
comradely discipline, involvement of personal interests and motives
into the collective cause, etc. All of these matters are unavoidable,
since the proletariat did not come into this world in the form of an
already shaped class. It arose from the ruined burghers and
peasants, from small property owners used to living in accord with
their own individual interests and susceptible to subordination to
influential authorities. It is understandable that it cannot quickly and
easily get rid of the useless spiritual characteristics of these classes.
Apart from that, workers organisations attract some non-proletarian
elements from the revolutionary intelligentsia, and from the still
gradually poorer petty-bourgeoisie; elements to which it is even
harder to adopt the spirit and sense of comradely cooperation.
Manifestations of individualism, ideological enslavement, ideological
rule, should be constantly and incessantly combatted, explaining their
incompatibility with proletarian socialism and the total impossibility of
reconciliation.
Especially hard and long persist the old habits in family life. The
commanding relationship of husband to wife, the compulsion of blind
obedience of children to parents this is the basis of the current
family. Capitalism destroys these habits, forcing women, youth and
even children to labour in factories and thanks to private earnings
giving them the ability for partial economic independence. But if in
this situation old relations between family members are retained, then
the head of the family often becomes the exploiter of his own wife
and children. Generally, the enslavement of women prevents the
working class from growing in strength, diminishing comradely ranks,
making the woman a brake and a burden for the worker in his
revolutionary efforts. Whereas the enslavement of children harms the
socialist upbringing of future combatants. This is why socialists
should energetically fight, in both word and by example, against any
remnants of family enslavement, not regarding it as a private or
unimportant matter. Too often it is the case that the worker
propagandising in the workplace neglects to do so in his family, hand

waving the backwardness of his own wife. Even today, cases of

barbarism occur within working class families. Meanwhile, the
working class family should already be permeated by the spirit of
socialism, transformed by the power of comradely relations of labour.
Socialism also requires a new science and a new philosophy. We
know that the point of science and philosophy is to unite the
experience of people as a whole, and the organisation of this
experience into a harmonious order. But the experiences of the
proletariat are different from the experiences of the old classes, which
is why previous forms of learning are insufficient. Marx initiated a new
social science and a new historical philosophy. We can imagine that
the whole of science and philosophy will take a new character in the
hands of the proletariat, because different conditions induce different
ways of perception and understanding of nature.
Contemporary science and philosophy possess a particular
character: learning is divided into separate specialisations, each one
weighted down by a mass of trivialities and subtleties, which require
nearly a whole human life time to comprehend. Scholars themselves
poorly understand each other, as each one does not see beyond their
own specialisation. For the proletariat, in its life and struggle, science
is needed. But not one which is only available to people in pieces and
leads to mutual incomprehension, because in conscious comradely
relations it is mutual understanding that is most important. The
creation of socialist knowledge should aim towards the simplification
and unification of science, the restoration of these general research
methods which could constitute the key to the various specialisations
and allow for their quick mastery. The same as a worker in machine
production who, knowing from experience the general features and
methods of technology, can relatively easily move from one
specialisation to another. It is understandable that it will require much
effort to bring the different sciences and philosophies to this state, but
then they will permeate into the masses and receive an incomparably
stronger and wider basis for their development. Science, the powerful
tool of the labour process, will be in that manner socialised, as
socialism requires in relation to all tools of labour.
Similarly to science, art also serves in uniting human experience into
a whole; only art does not organise it into abstract concepts but in
living images. Thanks to this character, art is more democratic than

science, it is closer to the masses and more widespread within it. The
proletariat needs its own socialist art, permeated with its own
feelings, aspirations, ideals. We can already indicate the first steps
leading to its formation. True, these are only the first, but extremely
difficult steps. Some artists and poets of non-proletarian origin have
allied with socialism and with their talents want to serve the great
cause. On the other side, in the working class environment one can
meet more and more beginner writers, who with the power of art want
to express the spirit of the proletariat. The former are in large part
unable to take the point of view of the proletariat, to see life through
its eyes, to feel with its heart. The latter lack artistic education, the
skill of clearly expressing their experience, their deepest thoughts and
feelings, in images. But they will achieve all of this with time through
their work and talent. Then new art will suddenly spread among the
masses, will incite to struggle and teach, will lead forwards to a bright
future.
It would of course be naive to suggest that already today, in a
capitalist system, the proletariat would be able to formulate its own
socialist culture. No, it is too large a task to be completed so quickly,
too large are the obstacles standing on its way. The constant need for
struggle against other classes alone imprints a specific trace on the
emerging culture, forces it to reflect the contradictions of social life,
prevents it from achieving the arrangement and harmony that will be
possible only when, in a unified society free from class struggle, there
will be socialism. Even so, there will not be a time when culture would
prove to be finally shaped and could stop its development. The aim of
human life is not fulfilment, but creativity and constant forward
motion.
This aim is closer to the proletariat than any other class, previous or
contemporary. Creating, in an unparalleled struggle with old society,
its own forms in all areas of life in everyday labour, in social activity,
within the family, in scientific and philosophical knowledge, in art
the proletariat will increasingly live its own way. It will socialistically
transform itself, to then socialistically transform all of humanity.
Originally published in Vpered(1911), under the title 'Sotsializm v
nastoiashchem'. This translation is adopted from the Polish version,
published in: Aleksandr Bogdanow, Socjalizm w dniu dzisiejszym,

trans. Wodzimierz Marciniak and Cezary Sikorski, Colloquia

Communia, 5-6 : 16-17 (1984), pp. 263-267